McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

Posted on: June 13, 2011 12:31 pm

Edited on: June 13, 2011 12:46 pm

By Evan Brunell

Frank McCourt appears to have a fight on his hands to meet all his payroll obligations for the month of June.

McCourt, who has already skated past previous payroll dates by the skin of his teeth, now has to meet payroll for both June 15 and 30, while contending with a court hearing June 22 that could determine his future with the Dodgers. And that's not all, as Manny Ramirez's 2011 deferred payment from his two-year, $45 million deal signed 2009 is due by June 30.

ESPN's Molly Knight confirmed on Monday that Ramirez is due $8.33 million by June 30, according to a source. However, it was already well-known that Ramirez was due $8.33 million by June 30 of 2011-13, with initial reports, including SI.com's Jon Heyman, coming shortly after the deal was inked in time for the 2009 season. The contract details had Ramirez being paid $10 million in 2009 and 2010 for his services, with deferred payments at no interest of $8.33 million due each of 2011-13.

Whether this is new information to the public, rest assured that this is not new to McCourt, who had to approve the deal as owner. He's known that this payment was coming for a while, so while it might be a lot harder for McCourt to come up with enough money for June, he's been prepared for it.

It could also become irrelevant very soon, as McCourt is due in court June 22 for a hearing in which he is asking the judge to approve a TV deal the Dodgers struck with Fox that has been held up by commissioner Bud Selig. All of McCourt's troubles trying to hang onto the team and pay his players would go away with a TV deal, while Selig seems intent on forcing McCourt out of the league. At the same court hearing, his ex-wife Jamie is requesting the judge order the team sold. If that ruling passes, how much money McCourt owes to the team and Ramirez becomes irrelevant.

Post Deleted by Administrator

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

That article has been especially as it should be developed, and it also shows a lots of treasured evidence. Anyway i revered a professed system of writing this short post.

Since: Jun 15, 2011

Posted on: June 15, 2011 11:14 am

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

I have no love for Mc Court but even less for Selig - Selig is not letting him cut the deal that would save him - his wife wants to force him to sell the club - and Mannie wants his bux - I would not want to be Mc Court - something has to give. Worst case scenario the league picks up the payroll and Selig manages the club for the league - that would be the worst thing that could happen to baseball and the Dodgers!!!!!!!

Since: Apr 28, 2009

Posted on: June 14, 2011 9:00 am

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

Remember the old Old Milwaukee Beer TV spot sign-off? "Fellas, it doesn't get any better than this."

Well, I don't think that the Dodger's ownership fiasco has quite reached that point. Indeed, critical mass will only be achieved if Jamie McCourt starts showing up at the ballpark accompanied by a well-muscled blond surfer in his late twenties, who starts every sentence with the word "like," ends every second sentence with the word "dude," wears his billowing golden hair down to his butt crack, and describes the most intimate moments of his relationship with Jamie as "gnarly".

In the event that this comes to pass...

Fellas, it doesn't get any better than this.

Since: Jul 1, 2008

Posted on: June 13, 2011 11:54 pm

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

McCourt's financial were shady at best when he took ownership of the Dodgers. Selig is a little responsible for all this to happen as he and the other owners approved McCourt's purchase. Maybe Manny will buy the Dodgers. He had more money than McCourt 10 years ago.

Since: Oct 14, 2010

Posted on: June 13, 2011 11:01 pm

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

McCourt deserves to lose the team on the basis of the Manny Ramirez contract alone. Of course, using that logic most of the owners make incredibly dumb decisions each year. The difference is that Frank doesn't have the money and "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." Ask Oprah, Rosie O'Donnell, Pat Summit, Kim Mulkey Robertson, and Jamie McCourt. Mrs. Representative Wiener remains to be seen and heard from.

Since: Sep 18, 2007

Posted on: June 13, 2011 10:52 pm

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

It isnt like Selig has been helping the Dodgers or McCourt, trying to bleed him dry to take the Dodgers away. Regardless of MLB rules, personal property is pretty had to just "take" away. Selig has it easy, its not his money he is fighting with. While McCourt may not be the best owner, but he is still spending more than ALOT of teams.

Since: Jun 28, 2007

Posted on: June 13, 2011 10:47 pm

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

That's the point. The union has way too much power. If you can't see the half billion dollars ARod makes is taken from the wallets of the fans, you're missing the point. Free enterprise or not, we complain when CEOs give themselves $20 million parachutes, but then try to legitimize a guy making $25 million/yr. for playing baseball. That is too much. You won't convince me otherwise.

SMURPH,

I hear you. One thing I want to know. Do you watch movies or TV? Do you complain that the actors are getting paid way too much money for what they are doing? Is it ok for an actor to get 25 million up front before the movie ever gets released? Is it ok for an actor to make over a million an episode on TV. Sure it is! It's what the market calls for. It's all entertainment. Whether it's Baseball, Football, Basketball, Hockey, Movies, TV or any other form of entertainment. In order to see it, you have to pay for it. All entertainment maybe over priced. But it is what it is. I just went to a movie yesterday. I took my wife, daughter and mother. We saw Kung Fu Panda 2. It was about a hour and a half long show. We spent over $70 and all we got is 4 tickets 4 soda's small popcorn and 1 bag of candy. Think that is over priced? Sure it is. If there was no demand for it the price would be a lot less. Just like all other entertainment including Baseball. The prices for all these events will eventually come down. They will have to because people just can not afford it anymore. People are already not showing up to a lot of events. TV revenue is still high enough to carry the teams, but that will change soon. I have had a DVR for the last 8 years and I do not watch commercials. What ever the sport or TV show I record, I wait at least 1 hour for a sport and 15 min or 1/2 hour depending on the length of the show to start watching. I do not watch any commercials. I'm sure I am not the only one. I know the TV industry knows this as well. They will stop giving such big money to sports in the very near future. Listen, everyone is over paid except you and I. We will just have to deal with it for now. I may not have changed your mind, but I'll bet I at least made you think about it.

Since: Apr 19, 2009

Posted on: June 13, 2011 10:12 pm

McCourt must pay Ramirez $8.33M by June 30

Frankie is one dumb MF'er. MLB doesn't want him around any more, Dodger fans don't want him around any more and I'd be willing to bet the players and management don't either. So Frankie, SELL. You could probably get $800m to a 1b for the Dodgers, the stadium, the land around the stadium and the baseball academy's. GO AWAY and bring in a Dennis Gilbert/Mark Cuban ownership group.